35 replies to this topic

[Baulven]

Now I fully expect to be lit on fire for this but what would people say to reducing IS endo to 11 crits and IS fero to 9 Crits.

I know this isn't lore but bear with me for a moment, In the table top game crits were often not a problem because you didn't have unlimited cash. Most of the time you had to run stock (or near stock) configurations since modifying mechs is so damn difficult and expensive.

In this game it would make sense to free up a bit more space (and less face it lore was out the window a long, long time ago) which would give a wider number of build options and possibly more parity.

The reason I ask this is the rescale touched a lot of IS mechs in the naughty bits and this may help them out a bit. It is similar to the idea of unlock Endo/FF on omnimechs - it might not fix everything but it could help out.

Thoughts?

[Bombast]

11/9 seems like a bizarre number. How did you get to that number?

[Baulven]

Bombast, on 15 October 2016 - 08:49 PM, said:

11/9 seems like a bizarre number. How did you get to that number?

Endo is more beneficial so slightly higher. Originally I was going to say 10/10 but that still gives no incentive to ever take FF (because IS FF sucks.) And if I suggested the Clan 7/7 there would be people saying no simply because lore.

I am trying to make it palatable for people to consider instead of asking for a change sweeping in nature. People are less likely to object to incremental change.

[Y E O N N E]

Better idea would be to just make IS guns a bit better ton-for-ton and slot-for-slot. That way, everybody wins.

[Baulven]

Yeonne Greene, on 15 October 2016 - 08:54 PM, said:

Better idea would be to just make IS guns a bit better ton-for-ton and slot-for-slot. That way, everybody wins.

Even if we pitched bringing them to on par with clan systems that would be a dumpster fire I think in rejection. I personally would love to see the T2 tech in game (which would go a long way to actual balance between the factions) but I don't see it coming anytime soon.

[Y E O N N E]

Baulven, on 15 October 2016 - 09:01 PM, said:

Even if we pitched bringing them to on par with clan systems that would be a dumpster fire I think in rejection. I personally would love to see the T2 tech in game (which would go a long way to actual balance between the factions) but I don't see it coming anytime soon.

On par does not mean exactly the same gun. An IS ML could be not-garbage and still be a 5 damage, 300 meter gun, it just has to shoot colder, shoot shorter, and shoot faster than it currently does, and it has to be good enough in its range bracket that it crushes the cERML ton for ton.

T2 tech would be lovely, but it shouldn't be necessary.

[Angel of Annihilation]

I am going to have to say no. IS weapons are already cooler than Clan Weapons and quirked, even cooler still. The net result is that most IS mechs are actually running cooler for the same firepower rating than Clan mechs even if they can't mount as many DHS as Clan Mechs.

Yeonne Greene, on 15 October 2016 - 08:54 PM, said:

Better idea would be to just make IS guns a bit better ton-for-ton and slot-for-slot. That way, everybody wins.

Then you have to start removing quirks. Honestly right now quite a few of my favorite IS build ONLY work because of the quirks. Start buffing IS weapons and removing quirks and your just as likely to find that your mechs actually perform worse once the quirk has been removed.

Also if anything, Many of the Clan Omni's are now starting to lag behind IS mechs in terms of power mostly due to their build restrictions and buffing the IS mechs without also buffing them would just make the situation worse.

[Y E O N N E]

Viktor Drake, on 15 October 2016 - 09:13 PM, said:

Then you have to start removing quirks.

You say that like I don't know that and like that isn't the intention.

Quote

Honestly right now quite a few of my favorite IS build ONLY work because of the quirks. Start buffing IS weapons and removing quirks and your just as likely to find that your mechs actually perform worse once the quirk has been removed.

As I said in another thread, quirks belong on outliers.

Quote

Also if anything, Many of the Clan Omni's are now starting to lag behind IS mechs in terms of power mostly due to their build restrictions and buffing the IS mechs without also buffing them would just make the situation worse.

Again, quirks are for outliers.

[Baulven]

Viktor Drake, on 15 October 2016 - 09:13 PM, said:

I am going to have to say no. IS weapons are already cooler than Clan Weapons and quirked, even cooler still. The net result is that most IS mechs are actually running cooler for the same firepower rating than Clan mechs even if they can't mount as many DHS as Clan Mechs.



Then you have to start removing quirks. Honestly right now quite a few of my favorite IS build ONLY work because of the quirks. Start buffing IS weapons and removing quirks and your just as likely to find that your mechs actually perform worse once the quirk has been removed.

Also if anything, Many of the Clan Omni's are now starting to lag behind IS mechs in terms of power mostly due to their build restrictions and buffing the IS mechs without also buffing them would just make the situation worse.

Well in theory if you only run certain weapons on certain mechs that means the weapons aren't worth using without the quirks. While those quirks on specific mechs would need to go it does mean there is a fundamental problem.

Then again clan large lasers are horrendous as well as other weapons. In short there needs to be a lot of rebalancing but we have the dartboard of destiny so I can't count on that.

Back to the topic at hand, is there any specific problem with this proposal? It frees up some space, which would be useful.

[Y E O N N E]

Baulven, on 15 October 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:

Well in theory if you only run certain weapons on certain mechs that means the weapons aren't worth using without the quirks. While those quirks on specific mechs would need to go it does mean there is a fundamental problem.

Then again clan large lasers are horrendous as well as other weapons. In short there needs to be a lot of rebalancing but we have the dartboard of destiny so I can't count on that.

Back to the topic at hand, is there any specific problem with this proposal? It frees up some space, which would be useful.

The problem is it messes with stock builds. I don't think it breaks any of them, since it's reducing slot count, but it does change the layout.

It also doesn't really allow me to do anything I can't already do. I get one extra DHS in for Endo if I have a ton to spare, but that's not exactly a game-changer.

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

Viktor Drake, on 15 October 2016 - 09:13 PM, said:

Also if anything, Many of the Clan Omni's are now starting to lag behind IS mechs in terms of power mostly due to their build restrictions and buffing the IS mechs without also buffing them would just make the situation worse.

No they aren't. What Clan omnis have been left behind? The Mist Lynx?

[Y E O N N E]

vnlk65n, on 15 October 2016 - 09:30 PM, said:

No they aren't. What Clan omnis have been left behind? The Mist Lynx?

MLX, KFX, SMN, aaaaaand that's about it. To be honest, they are still doing better than the worst IS 'Mechs.

[Mcgral18]

Heck, why not 10 and 5?

Still worse than the Clam version, but less so.
FF offers the 8% difference, for 2 fewer slots. Endo the same, for more slots.

[Deathlike]

I feel like these are the kinds of things our balance overlord would have made up.

Please, do not one up him.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Yeonne Greene, on 15 October 2016 - 09:04 PM, said:

On par does not mean exactly the same gun. An IS ML could be not-garbage and still be a 5 damage, 300 meter gun, it just has to shoot colder, shoot shorter, and shoot faster than it currently does, and it has to be good enough in its range bracket that it crushes the cERML ton for ton. T2 tech would be lovely, but it shouldn't be necessary.

See this is exactly why so many of these posts are garbage and it is because people don't actually think about anything but how to make their favorite mech better.

An IS ML is already much cooler than a Clan ER ML, only 4 heat verses 6 heat for the C-ER ML. That is a full 33% less heat generated per shot. The IS ML has a duration of only 0.9 seconds to apply full damage where as the C ER ML takes 1.15 seconds. That is roughly 30% faster to apply damage. Also because the duration is 30% shorter, it means that the IS ML is ready to fire after 3.9 seconds have elapsed verses the Clan ER ML taking 4.15 seconds to be ready to fire again so the IS ML fires faster too.

When you start adding all this up, you start realizing that the 2 damage difference in the alpha isn't even close to 2 damage difference, in fact from a raw damage standpoint when you consider in factors like the overall heat efficiency of IS MLs when mounted on a mech, the IS ML laser is likely beating out the Clan ER ML. If you want a hard example of this, if you do the math, 3 IS MLs produce the same heat as 2 C-ER ML and they will do more damage.

3 x IS ML = 15 damage for 12 heat generated. 1.25 damage per heat point and can fire 15.38 times in 60 seconds. In that 60 seconds it will only take 13.84 seconds on target to output full damage amount. Total damage in 60 seconds = 225 damage.

2 x C-ER ML = 14 damage for 12 heat generated. 1.16 damage per heat point and can fire 14.45 times in 60 seconds. In that 60 seconds it will take 16.62 seconds to apply full damage amount. Total damage in 60 seconds = 196 damage.

(Note: these numbers and ratios still hold even if you compare 1 IS ML to 1 C-ER ML)

Overall I find that IS MLs can theoretically do about 15% more damage than C-ER ML over the course of a match and that is before you take into account that firing a IS ML will have significantly less impact on heat than a C-ER ML will. That is significant in and of itself because once a mech reaches its heat threshold, it has to stop firing completely. The outcome here is that for the same amount of heat sinks, the IS ML is much more heat efficient which means it can keep up its sustained fire much longer than can the C-ER ML. This further increases the IS MLs capacity to do even more damage then the C-ER ML throughout the course of a match, not to mention the lesser impact the IS ML will have on being able to fire other weapons like ER PPCs, LPLs, or any other heat generating weapons.

Now throw in quirks that can make these IS MLs up to 10% cooler than they are or fire 10% faster than they already do and then it only gets worse for the C-ER ML. The ONLY thing the C-ER ML has going for it is range and even that advantage can be significantly reduced by quirks.

What make this reply even more unbelievable is you seem to think that even with all these factors going on, IS MLs should be even more heat efficient, faster firing and easy to apply damage with than they already are and what is worse, is your not even asking for balance, rather you even say that the IS ML should "crush" the C-ER ML ton for ton. Well guess what? Ton for Ton, it already does.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 15 October 2016 - 10:00 PM.

[Deathlike]

Viktor Drake, on 15 October 2016 - 09:58 PM, said:

See this is exactly why so many of these posts are garbage and it is because people don't actually think about anything but how to make their favorite mech better.

An IS ML is already much cooler than a Clan ER ML, only 4 heat verses 6 heat for the C-ER ML. That is a full 33% less heat generated per shot. The IS ML has a duration of only 0.9 seconds to apply full damage where as the C ER ML takes 1.15 seconds. That is roughly 30% faster to apply damage. Also because the duration is 30% shorter, it means that the IS ML is ready to fire after 3.9 seconds have elapsed verses the Clan ER ML taking 4.15 seconds to be ready to fire again so the IS ML fires faster too.

When you start adding all this up, you start realizing that the 2 damage difference in the alpha isn't even close to 2 damage difference, in fact from a raw damage standpoint when you consider in factors like the overall heat efficiency of IS MLs when mounted on a mech, the IS ML laser is likely beating out the Clan ER ML. If you want a hard example of this, if you do the math, 3 IS MLs produce the same heat as 2 C-ER ML and they will do more damage.

3 x IS ML = 15 damage for 12 heat generated. 1.25 damage per heat point and can fire 15.38 times in 60 seconds. In that 60 seconds it will only take 13.84 seconds on target to output full damage amount. Total damage in 60 seconds = 225 damage.

2 x C-ER ML = 14 damage for 12 heat generated. 1.16 damage per heat point and can fire 14.45 times in 60 seconds. In that 60 seconds it will take 16.62 seconds to apply full damage amount. Total damage in 60 seconds = 196 damage.

(Note: these numbers and ratios still hold even if you compare 1 IS ML to 1 C-ER ML)

Overall I find that IS MLs can theoretically do about 15% more damage than C-ER ML over the course of a match and that is before you take into account that firing a IS ML will have significantly less impact on heat than a C-ER ML will. That is significant in and of itself because once a mech reaches its heat threshold, it has to stop firing completely. The outcome here is that for the same amount of heat sinks, the IS ML is much more heat efficient which means it can keep up its sustained fire much longer than can the C-ER ML. This further increases the IS MLs capacity to do even more damage then the C-ER ML throughout the course of a match, not to mention the lesser impact the IS ML will have on being able to fire other weapons like ER PPCs, LPLs, or any other heat generating weapons.

Now throw in quirks that can make these IS MLs up to 10% cooler than they are or fire 10% faster than they already do and then it only gets worse for the C-ER ML. The ONLY thing the C-ER ML has going for it is range and even that advantage can be significantly reduced by quirks.

What make this reply even more unbelievable is you seem to think that even with all these factors going on, IS MLs should be even more heat efficient, faster firing and easy to apply damage with than they already are and what is worse, is your not even asking for balance, rather you even say that the IS ML should "crush" the C-ER ML ton for ton. Well guess what? Ton for Ton, it already does.

You are talking about numbers, but he's talking about practicality.

I would rather use CERMEDs over IS MEDs given a choice of tech (mixed or otherwise) because the practicality of using a 1ton+1crit weapon at mid range is much better than the short range that the IS MED would provide.

Med Lasers might be the workhorse of the IS, but their role is limited just as much as CERMEDs are jack of all trades type that is useful in many more cases then the IS MED.

[Y E O N N E]

Viktor Drake, on 15 October 2016 - 09:58 PM, said:

See this is exactly why so many of these posts are garbage and it is because people don't actually think about anything but how to make their favorite mech better.

An IS ML is already much cooler than a Clan ER ML, only 4 heat verses 6 heat for the C-ER ML. That is a full 33% less heat generated per shot. The IS ML has a duration of only 0.9 seconds to apply full damage where as the C ER ML takes 1.15 seconds. That is roughly 30% faster to apply damage. Also because the duration is 30% shorter, it means that the IS ML is ready to fire after 3.9 seconds have elapsed verses the Clan ER ML taking 4.15 seconds to be ready to fire again so the IS ML fires faster too.

You have simply failed to do all of the math.

Sure, IS laser is 4 heat. Four cERML is 28 damage and 24 heat at 405 meters. Me? I have to bring six isML and I deal 30 damage and 24 heat. I've spent 50% more tonnage to do 2 points more damage at 67% of the range for the exact same heat.

And duration? You are doing 7 damage per laser over 1.15 seconds. That's 6.09 damage per tick (DPT). isML? Gets 5 damage over 0.9 seconds for 5.56 DPT. The cERML gives you the option to either pull off of the target at 0.9 seconds and have done more damage than the isML, or to hold that burn and get the full 7 in. You people trying to work the duration argument are running a farce, because how much damage you receive is entirely under your control.

And how about DPS? 7 over 4.15 is 1.69. 5 over 3.9 is 1.28. Hmmm...

Sure, six isML has better DPT and DPS than four cERML, but it damn well better because it's 50% heavier and has shorter range.

But you know what? This doesn't exist in a vacuum. No. The Clan 'Mech will bring more heat-sinks. So that theoretical 'Mech with only four cERML? It's going to run way colder than my IS 'Mech with six isML. Alternatively, it's going to be able to bring way more guns that have way more range for what they cost you in 'Mech resources. So...Jenner IIC with six cERML vs. Locust with six isML? Once upon a time, before the Locust got whacked, it was a serious choice to make. Now? Jenner, every time, because it has the range and the duration is who cares, because I'm firing from a relatively safe distance compared to that Locust.

But wait, there's more! So not only is the isML an inferior poking weapon at 400 meters, it's also crushed at the 200 meter bracket where it should be awesome. Why? Because there are cERSL, which weigh half a ton and can be boated in huge quantities. The Clan 'Mech takes a few steps to get to 220 meters and then cuts loose, firing 30+30 and there's nothing you can do to stop it. There is nothing in the IS arsenal that can nuke a 'Mech like that outside of an Atlas.

I mean, really, do you see anybody in MWOWC taking unquirked IS 'Mechs? No? That's because the guns are garbage. Full stop. How many IS 'Mechs, period, do you see? Three: Spider, Warhammer, and Grasshopper. And that's on a client from May; they haven't had all the more recent "balance" changes applied, such as the rescale and the nerfs to the Marauder, Warhammer, Blackjack, Locust, etc.

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

Viktor Drake, on 15 October 2016 - 09:58 PM, said:

What make this reply even more unbelievable is you seem to think that even with all these factors going on, IS MLs should be even more heat efficient, faster firing and easy to apply damage with than they already are and what is worse, is your not even asking for balance, rather you even say that the IS ML should "crush" the C-ER ML ton for ton. Well guess what? Ton for Ton, it already does.

No idea why you would hinge the entire discussion on one piece of equipment. That is actually delusional. You're not piloting a medium laser.

How important do you think some debatable advantage in medium lasers is compared to the fact that IS don't have any mechs that can boat ML anyways.. or Clan Gauss superiority.. or the fact that IS players have to play **** variants half the time to master a mech.. or lack UAC/LBX2/10/20, SSRM4/6, ERML/SL etc... or only have 10 dmg ERPPC.. I can go on e t c.

Both the analysis of tournament scores, and the input of high level players in competitive tell us that yes, it's beyond debate that IS mechs are worse than Clan mechs, with only very few and very specific exceptions.

Ultimately it all boils down to the fact that IS engines intrinsically disadvantage IS mechs. IS mechs will never be able to compete with the firepower/survivability/mobility balance of Clan mechs, because taking an XL engine to go as fast and carry as much firepower as a Clan mech cripples your survivability far more than will ever be compensated by some absolutely microscopic advantage in medium laser heat/damage within 270m.

[iliketurtles87]

there is no reason to play IS mechs at all

[Baulven]

Mcgral18, on 15 October 2016 - 09:36 PM, said:

Heck, why not 10 and 5?

Still worse than the Clam version, but less so.
FF offers the 8% difference, for 2 fewer slots. Endo the same, for more slots.

Personally I would be ok with that but I don't know how other people would feel. Hell this thread devolved into random stuff quick, including insults but I maintain that giving the IS more space to work with would be a benefit. More build options couldn't hurt.